Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘San Antonio’

A message from Public Citizen, SEED Coalition, and Environment Texas:

Your help is needed right away to put energy efficiency into place!

Please call or email your city councilmember today to tell them you support STEP – the new energy efficiency program for San Antonio!

Tomorrow, San Antonio City Council will decide on how CPS Energy can fund their energy efficiency programs known as STEP (Save for Tomorrow Energy Plan). CPS Energy has set a goal to save 771 Megawatts of power through energy efficiency programs by 2020.  This would be one of the most aggressive efficiency goals in the country and we support it!

Energy efficiency is the cheapest energy resource CPS Energy can invest in.  By spending money on weatherizing low income homes and providing rebates for people to purchase high efficiency appliances, CPS avoids having to purchase more expensive energy that would cost everyone more. In addition, people who take advantage of these programs will begin saving money on their utility bills immediately, offsetting the cost of the programs!

Call or email your city councilmember today to tell them:

-I support energy efficiency and urge you to approve STEP

-I want public accountability for these programs through quarterly reporting including information such as the amount of money spent on and energy saved from each program

-I want to be sure that CPS spends the money they collect for STEP on energy efficiency and solar rebates, not for other purposes like coal or nuclear plants!

Mayor   Phil Hardberger (210) 207-7060   phardberger@sanantonio.gov

District 1   Mary Alice P. Cisneros (210) 207-7279   district1@sanantonio.gov

District 2   Sheila D. McNeil (210) 207-7278   district2@sanantonio.gov

District 3   Jennifer V. Ramos (210) 207-7064   district3@sanantonio.gov

District 4   Philip A. Cortez (210) 207-7281   district4@sanantonio.gov

District 5   Lourdes Galvan (210) 207-7043   district5@sanantonio.gov

District 6   Delicia Herrera (210) 207-7065 district6@sanantonio.gov

District 7   Justin Rodriguez (210) 207-7044 district7@sanantonio.gov

District 8   Diane G. Cibrian (210) 207-7086 district8@sanantonio.gov

District 9   Louis E. Rowe (210) 207-7325 district9@sanantonio.gov

District 10   John G. Clamp (210) 207-7276   district10@sanantonio.gov

If you don’t know who your councilmember is, find out here.

If you are able to, show up at City Hall tomorrow and talk to City Council about STEP.  It is agenda item #5 and should be up before lunchtime.  If you would like to speak, though, you have to sign up in person between 8-9 AM (114 W. Commerce).  If you can’t sign up in time, come by and be there for support!

Read Full Post »

Kudos and many thanks to San Antonio’s outgoing Mayor Hardberger and council members Justin Rodriguez, Jennifer Ramos, Lourdes Galvan, and Phillip Cortez for signing on to a letter urging Congressman Charlie Gonzalez to get with the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act program.

The letter reads:

We have an unprecedented opportunity to put San Antonians to work in new green jobs — building wind turbines, installing solar panels, weatherizing homes, and laying a smarter electric grid that will power our new energy economy.  We also believe it is of the utmost important that we rescue our children, our grandchildren, and the world they’ll inherit from the ravages of global warming.

According to Greg Harman at the San Antonio Current’s QueQue blog,

The cadre adds the weight of local elected leadership to an ongoing campaign working to ensure San Antonio’s representative in Congress (serving on the influential House Committee on Energy & Commerce) pushes for binding commitments to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions quickly while transitioning the economy into a more sustainable direction.

Hopefully Charlie is feeling the pressure and will back away from the polluter giveaways he’s been flirting with as of late.  That’s because, everybody with me now, Giving Away Allowances is a Terrible Way to Write This Bill.  EPA’s most recent analysis says that giving away pollution credits is “highly regressive”, meaning it hurts low-income families the most. At best, this is a bailout and a free ride for the polluters. At worst it will create windfall profits for huge energy companies at the expense of every lower and middle income family in Texas.

Just listen to that broken record spin. No shame here, I’ll say it as many times as it takes for it sink in.

Read Full Post »

willie V

Read Full Post »

Phillip Martin at Burnt Orange Report reports that VoteVets.org is running a telelvision ad in San Antonio urging Congressman Charlie Gonzalez to support the American Clean Energy and Security Act (aka the Waxman & Markey bill, the federal cap and trade bill, or, as Trevor over at ReEnergize Texas has taken to calling it, the Bill That May or May Not Save the World — take your pick).

As you may recall, we’ve been pushing on US Congressman Gonzalez lately to support a strong climate change bill ever since we heard he might want to go over to the dark side and  give away free carbon credits to utilities.  Two weekends ago we hit him up at the King William’s Fair in San Antonio to make sure he heard the message loud and clear: No Giveaways for Polluters.

Giving away allowances would force customers to pay for industry and utilities’ right to pollute without even cutting carbon emissions.  This is exactly what went wrong with the European Union’s cap and trade experiment.  They gave away carbon credits, so that industries had a free ticket to pollute — but then industry turned around to consumers, raised rates because they could pretend they had “compliance costs” to cover, and working families had to foot the bill while energy companies made windfall profits.

But according to a new EPA analysis of the Bill That May or May Not Save the World, making polluters pay would actually leave families better off than before:

Assuming that the bulk of the revenues from the program are returned to households, the cap-and-trade policy has a relatively modest impact on U.S. consumers. . . . Returning the revenues in this fashion could make the median household, and those living at lower ends of the income distribution, better off than they would be without the program.

This new VoteVets ad explains how tackling climate change and moving toward clean energy is also a national security matter.  Phil posted the following quote from Patrick Bellon, an Iraq War Veteran from Texas that speaks in the ad,

Getting America less dependent on foreign oil and towards clean energy is a national security matter,” said Bellon, who also is a member of VoteVets.org. “Congressman Gonzalez has a chance to vote for a comprehensive clean energy jobs bill that would lessen those Middle East oil profits that help fund terrorism, and would create jobs right here. As someone who’s fought against insurgents in Iraq, this bill is a no brainer, and we’re hoping the Congressman feels the same way.

Check it out for yourself:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGpwzTtTGqQ]

Word is that the ad will run over 600 times in the San Antonio market, and a similar ad is running in Congressman Gene Green’s district.  Many thanks to Phil at BOR for bringing this to our attention 🙂

It really warms my heart that VoteVets has joined in this fight, adding another crucial voice to the cap and trade choir.  Done right, this bill could reduce our emissions such that the US can steer clear of runaway global warming, jump-start a new clean energy economy and set the standard for strong climate legislation at Copenhagen in December.

There are a lot of good reasons to support this bill, and only two real voices that oppose it: those that don’t believe global warming is real, and the monied interests that benefit from the status quo.  Looking at what we and future generations stand to lose, neither represents a legitimate argument.

On a related note, San Antonio folks have another opportunity this afternoon to show Charlie their support for a strong climate change bill at a MoveOn.org rally.  Details after the jump. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Impressive nuclear headlines in the papers these days, largely as a result of a new report released by our office entitled: “Costs of Current and Planned Nuclear Power Plants in Texas: A Consumer Perspective.  The report finds that the proposed expansions of nuclear power plants in Bay City (South Texas Project) and Glen Rose (Comanche Peak) could cost $22 billion, boost the cost of electricity for consumers and curtail investment in energy-efficiency programs and solar power.

The headline in the San Antonio Express News yesterday morning, just below the banner no less, read: Nuke Plan May Cost $22 Billion

This morning the Fort Worth Star Telegram also ran an article titled Anti-nuclear group: Comanche Peak expansion could cost $27.6 billion

The San Antonio Current’s Queblog also reports: Projected nuke power’s price tag inflating.  

In addition to a real cost estimate for nuclear power plant expansions in Texas, the report also compares the cost of nuclear power to the cost of alternatives such as wind, solar, and energy efficiency.  I’d encourage anyone who complains about the expense of renewable energy but claims that nuclear power is “cheap” to take a gander at the following graph: 

estimated-installed-cost-per-kw-11

Wow.  Even on the low estimate end, energy efficiency costs just a fifth of what we would spend to get that kind of power from a nuclear plant, and wind and solar both come in well under that cost of nukes.  Take that, naysayers!

A major concern brought up in this report is that the massive capitol outlays for nuclear power options may drain available financial resources for making advancements in deploying more cost effective alternative resources.  In San Antonio, this could mean that CPS Energy chooses to partner with the South Texas Project Nuclear Expansion at the expense of Mission Verde, Mayor Phil Hardberger’s aggressive plan to green the city’s infrastructure, businesses, energy sources and technology.

“This new report indicates that we’re going to have to decide now which energy future we want for San Antonio,” said Bexar County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson. “If CPS becomes a partner in the South Texas Project expansion, we are simply not going to have the financial resources to front Mission Verde. We can either choose the most expensive option possible and send our jobs to Bay City and overseas contractors, or pay a fraction of the cost to create thousands of jobs here at home and power the city with clean, green energy.”

For more information on how consumers could get stuck with the check if the nuclear plant goes over-budget or can’t meet its construction schedule (as they are notoriously wont to do), check out our press release.

The San Antonio Current’s Queblog reports,

Prior to deregulation in 2001, ratepayers were drained of $5 billion in capital costs for the nukes in North Texas and Bay City, according to Johnson’s “Costs of Current and Planned Nuclear Power Plants in Texas.”

Also, much of the overruns associated with Comanche Peak and STP have been borne by electric consumers in Texas’ deregulated market since, who “continue to pay off at least $3.4 billion for nuclear assets through transition charges, as well as $45 million in annual payments for nuclear decommissioning,” Johnson writes. 

Additional associated STP costs have also been passed along by AEP and CenterPoint to their customers.

Those interested in the report may also download either the full report or a short fact-sheet detailing the report’s major findings.

Along these same lines, turns out today is the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS)’s national call-in day to end coal and nuclear subsidies. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Original post found at the ReEnergize Texas blog, courtesy of Trevor Lovell:

At a hearing of the Texas Senate Committee on Higher Education today SB 2182, known as the green fee bill, “was reported favorably to the Calendars Committee by unanimous vote, clearing another hurdle on its way to becoming law.

Only two weeks ago the bill was looking badly wounded after staff working for Higher Education Committee Chairwoman Zaffirini (D-Laredo) noted “philosphical concerns” with the bill’s statewide approach to approving environmental service fees, prompting bill author Sen. Eliot Shapleigh (D-El Paso) to pull the bill from a scheduled hearing. In response and virtually overnight, ReEnergize Texas mobilized an Earth Week campaign, generating constituent phone calls from El Paso, Austin, San Antonio, College Station, and elsewhere throughout the state.

Aggie Adrienne Jones (seen here talking to US Rep. Lloyd Doggett) sent a letter supporting SB 2182

Aggie Adrienne Jones (seen here talking to US Rep. Lloyd Doggett) sent a letter supporting SB 2182

Walking into the Senate Higher Education Committee office on Earth Day, ReEnergize Texas Director Trevor Lovell was greeted by staff holding ironic smiles and saying “Our phones have been ringing off the hook… you wouldn’t have anything to do with that, would you?”
Adrienne Jones, seen here talking to US Congressman Lloyd Doggett, sent a letter supportin SB 2182

Aggie Adrienne Jones (seen here talking to US Rep. Lloyd Doggett) sent a letter supporting SB 2182.

By the following Monday SB 2182 had been set for a Wednesday hearing. Students from UT Pan America, South Texas College, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, and UT Austin wrote letters to the members of the committee, asking them to support the bill. (more…)

Read Full Post »

king-williams-parade-pics-048

photo courtesy of Karen Hadden & SEED Coalition

Our ambush of U.S. Congressman Charlie Gonzalez at the King William’s Fair in San Antonio this weekend was both a blast and a great success.

If you couldn’t make it out, never fear — Greg Harman at the San Antonio Current did, and just posted a great blog post with full coverage from the parade.  Be sure to check out the video, featuring our very own Sarah McDonald, ReEnergize Texas’ Patrick Meaney, and cameos from a whole host of Public Citizen, ReEnergize Texas, and SEED Coalition staff and volunteers.

More good news from the Curblog is that Charlie Gonzalez is still listening to both sides of the auction-or-free-allowances debate, Bloomberg article to the contrary.

Harman reports,

Ginette Magaña, a spokesperson for Rep. Gonzalez, said her boss had not committed to either side on the matter of carbon credits.

Not only that, but no letter exists as reported in the Bloomberg article, she insisted.

“There is no letter,” Magaña said. “He’s still looking at the bill and trying to find the best decision. I don’t have anything other than that right now … Charlie had never signed on to that letter … There is no letter.”

Things are certainly looking up.  Check out this diary from Trevor Lovell of ReEnergize Texas fame for another perspective on the parade:

Sorry Charlie, Giveaways Aren’t Green

“This feels like one of the good old campaigns,” said Tom “Smitty” Smith, Executive Director of Public Citizen’s Texas office, Saturday afternoon in reference to activists swarming Congressman Charlie Gonzalez’s carriage in the King William Parade that morning in San Antonio.

Smitty may have been showing his age a bit (he’s directed Public Citizen’s Texas office for the last 25 years, and become a local legend and then some in the process), but the sentiments were positive among organizers young and old alike.

Congressman Charlie Gonzalez is the key swing vote on a subcommittee considering the Waxman-Markey bill.  A conservative Democrat, Gonzalez has joined a misguided throng calling for CO2 credits to be given away, a solution deemed unacceptable by environmentalists and economists who point out that such a system would create unfair profits for polluters and cripple any attempt at CO2 real reductions.

Learning late Thursday that Congressman Gonzalez would be in the King William Parade, a Fiesta celebration for the well-to-do and well-connected King William neighborhood of San Antonio, activists at Public Citizen, SEED Coalition, and my group, the ReEnergize Texas student coalition, got together and planned a full scale outreach and publicity action to let the Congressman know that giveaways are unacceptable. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Charlie Gonzalez Update!!

Tomorrow morning at the King William Parade in San Antonio, we’ve got a great opportunity to put some pressure on Congressman Charlie Gonzalez to support strong cap and trade legislation.  Done right, a cap and trade bill would bring San Antonio thousands of green jobs, increased energy efficiency programs, and renewable energy.  Done wrong, it would force families and consumers to pay for industry and utilities’ right to pollute without a considerable reduction in carbon emissions.

So far, Congressman Gonzalez has come out in support of the latter 🙁 He is a swing vote on this issue, and how he decides to vote may influence many other important legislators.

Lucky for us, we’ll have him as a captive audience at the parade tomorrow.  He’ll be riding on a float in the parade, and that’s our
chance to make an impact when he least expects it.

Please join us tomorrow morning.  We’ll be meeting up at the 8 AM at the San Antonio Peace Center, at 1443 S. St. Mary’s — but don’t let the early hour scare you, if you can’t make it out before breakfast, the parade doesn’t start until 10.  Come by — we’ll have banners, materials to make a signs, and sign on letters.  Costumes are encouraged — after all it is a party 🙂

Free parking will be available at 1901 S Alamo Street.

For more information on this issue, check out the following statement from Andy Wilson, our Global Warming Program Director on how U.S. Rep. Charlie Gonzalez Wants to Give San Antonio’s Municipal Utility a Free Ride

Read Full Post »

According to a Bloomberg article this morning, San Antonio Representative Charlie Gonzalez has joined

a group of Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee (who) want to give utilities free permits for all their existing carbon emissions, according to people familiar with a plan sent to the committee’s chairman.

The article continues:

Representative Rick Boucher of Virginia sent the four-page list of recommendations to Henry Waxman, the committee’s chairman and the author of draft climate-change legislation that some of his fellow Democrats are seeking to temper, said the people, who declined to be identified before the plan is made public. Courtney Lamie, Boucher’s spokeswoman, didn’t respond to e-mail and phone messages.

Waxman’s measure would establish a cap-and-trade system of pollution credits designed to cut carbon dioxide 20 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. He needs to win the support of Boucher and the other Democrats pushing for changes in his plan because no Republicans are likely to vote for it, Representative Gene Green, a Texas Democrat, said yesterday.

“It’s all about the consumer,” said Representative Charles Gonzalez of Texas, whose San Antonio-area district has oil and gas operations. “It’s also the economic interests of a member’s district or region.”

Charlie Gonzalez just doesn’t have his facts straight on this one.  If you’re really concerned about consumers, giving away pollution credits for free is about the worst way you can write this bill.  Giving away allowances would force customers to pay for industry and utilities’ right to pollute without even cutting carbon emissions.  There is a right and a very wrong way to write a good climate change bill, and Charlie is supporting the wrong way.

EPA’s most recent analysis say that giving away pollution credits is “highly regressive”, meaning it hurts low-income families the most.  At best, this is a bailout and a free ride for the polluters.  At worst it will create windfall profits for huge energy companies at the expense of every lower and middle income family in Texas.  However, an auction fixes these problems.  EPA continues:

“Assuming that the bulk of the revenues from the program are returned to households, the cap-and-trade policy has a relatively modest impact on U.S. consumers. . . . Returning the revenues in this fashion could make the median household, and those living at lower ends of the income distribution, better off than they would be without the program

A good climate change bill will create billions of dollars of revenue by charging large polluters for the dangerous pollutants they’ve been emitting for decades.  This money could then be returned to taxpayers, particularly low-income households, to protect them from any price increases that energy industries may try to pass through to consumers.  Another portion of the money could also be used to pursue aggressive energy efficiency programs, so that citizens can save even more money by using less electricity.  Every dollar spent on energy efficiency will then also help reinvigorate local economy by putting people back to work doing energy audits and retrofitting inefficient homes.

Congressman Charlie Gonzalez needs to hear that what consumers really need is energy efficiency, renewable energy, lower electric bills and less pollution — not more industry giveaways.  So far, it looks like he’s only heard from the lobbyists for the big polluters.  We’ve heard that  Congressman Gonzalez will cast a deciding vote on whether Texans will be given the tools to forge a new, green economy, or left unprotected from the worst effects of extreme weather and high energy prices.

Congressman Charlie Gonzalez is the swing vote on this issue.  Please pick up the phone and call him.  The phone number for his DC office is (202) 225-3236 and his office in San Antonio is (210) 472-6195.  You can also email his office from his website

Read Full Post »

Greg Harman at the San Antonio Current broke this story a few days back and I just feel like we have to comment:

As Washington strains under the weight of industry and environmental lobbyists seeking to influence the outcome of what would be our first national climate bill, CPS Energy has been quietly working the angles on Capitol Hill to keep the coal power the city has come to rely on cheap for consumers in the short term. So-called “cheap” power is the mandate the utility operates under, after all.

Too bad that mandate is now at odds with the survival of the earth as we know it and, quite possibly, our survival as a city and a nation.

Responding to an Open Records request submitted by the Current, a CPS Energy legal staffer wrote that the City-owned utility has spent $91,700 lobbying in the past year “in the attempt to influence U.S. climate policy.”

According to Zandra Pulis, senior legal counsel at CPS, the utility has also spent about $67,657 in membership dues to the Climate Policy Group, an industry group it joined in September of 2006 that lobbies Congress against limiting carbon emissions under cap-and-trade legislation. An effort that, to this point, has been remarkably successful.

All told, CPS has spent $2.56 million on lobbyists (since 1999) working the statehouse and the Capitol, according to Pulis.

That’s right — CPS has spent millions of YOUR dollars on lobbying, much of which has gone to try to argue climate change isn’t happening.

Look, I understand that CPS has a mission to produce inexpensive electricity for San Antonio residents and business.  That’s a good thing.  But the facts are these:

1- Climate change is happening.  But even if it wasn’t, everything we need to do to solve it is something that we would want to be to doing anyway.  We need to start living with the fact that political consensus has developed in Washington.  Sooner or later, we’re going to have to  start paying for our greenhouse gas pollution, so we’d better start figuring out how to get our energy from non-polluting sources. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Breaking, wicked-sweet news from the U.S. Department of Energy:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, March 26, 2009

Obama Administration Announces Additional $208,759,900 for Local Energy Efficiency Improvements in Texas

Block Grants to Support Jobs, Cut Energy Bills, and Increase Energy Independence

WASHINGTON – Vice President Joe Biden and Energy Secretary Steven Chu today announced plans to invest $3.2 billion in energy efficiency and conservation projects in U.S. cities, counties, states, territories, and Native American tribes. This includes $208,759,900 for state, county and city efforts in Texas. A detailed breakdown is below.

Today’s announcement builds on an investment of $545,757,732 in Texas weatherization and energy funding announced by the Administration on March 12th and detailed at energy.gov/recovery.

“These investments will save taxpayer dollars and create jobs in communities around the country,” said Vice President Biden. “Local leaders will have the flexibility in how they put these resources to work – but we will hold them accountable for making the investments quickly and wisely to spur the local economy and cut energy use.”

The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant program, funded by President Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, will provide formula grants for projects that reduce total energy use and fossil fuel emissions, and improve energy efficiency.

The funding will support energy audits and energy efficiency retrofits in residential and commercial buildings, the development and implementation of advanced building codes and inspections, and the creation of financial incentive programs for energy efficiency improvements. Other activities eligible for use of grant funds include transportation programs that conserve energy, projects to reduce and capture methane and other greenhouse gas emissions from landfills, renewable energy installations on government buildings, energy efficient traffic signals and street lights, deployment of Combined Heat and Power and district heating and cooling systems, and others.

Of that sum, the City of Austin would get $7,492,70, Dallas $12,787,300, Houston $22,765,100, San Antonio $12,897,00, Georgetown $201,900, New Braunsfels $498,200, and San Marcos $498,100.  The State Energy Office would also get $45,638,100.

That’s a lot of weather stripping and double panes:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pezKEkBIhqA]

A detailed breakdown of funding to state, city, and county governments after the jump.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Ever wonder what Public Citizen is telling your Austin City Council members?  Wish, granted!

scroll1Feb 11, 2009

Dear Council Member,

Will Austin remain a renewable energy leader or will it fade into the background as San Antonio, the Texas Legislature, and the Federal government move ahead to turn crisis into opportunity? Decision makers from all levels of government recognize that investing in clean energy projects will not only stimulate the economy but also combat climate change and localized pollution. Why would Austin pass this up?

We urge City Council to act now to approve the Webberville solar plant. We recognize the fact that the city faces an anemic budget this year due to reduced sales tax revenue. Since Austin Energy operates on a separate budget, it is in an advantageous position to keep its solar plans intact and on time.

Solar energy’s benefits far exceed its costs even during these uncertain economic tifcmes when you consider several factors: (more…)

Read Full Post »

coverI’m embarrassed.

Greg Harman at the San Antonio Current beat me to covering my own press conference.  And he did a way better job than I ever could have done.

The only explanation is that Greg Harman is Superman.  Or, that I am one very busy media coordinator who needs to re-align her priorities (from now on, the internet wins!).

I’m so ashamed, it doesn’t even seem worth it to write anything myself.

Save me the effort, and go to his post at the San Antonio Current Queblog.  Read about how within the span of two weeks, SA’s CPS Energy pledged to transition to a decentralized power model (ie, energy created on site rather than at a power plant).  Learn how last Thursday, Mayor Hardberger unveiled his visionary Mission Verde Plan to make San Antonio a truly sustainable city.  Proceed to Harman’s excitement over the sea change at the Legislature, such that fully 15 solar bills have been filed this session.

And then check out his fantastic video, photos, and audio clips.  It almost feels like you were there!  Watch our very own David Power, solar advocate, announce how the solar industry can provide Texas’ next big job boom!  Smile as Bill Sinkin and his bow tie refer to solar energy as a full grown child no longer in need of coddling, but still looking for our support.  And listen to County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson trumpet that Texas has reached a critical mass and perfect storm for extensive solar power in the state of Texas to finally become a reality.

Hey hey, looks like I can steal his video from youtube.  I LOVE THE INTERNET.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDFfv9Scwfo]

You should still go to his post though, because it is wicked awesome and I can’t steal his audio clips.  Or rather, don’t know how.

Also check out the San Antonio Express-New’s coverage: Nonprofits say boosting solar capability in Texas could create jobs. We don’t “say” so, we know so.

Ten “cool” points if you caught the Real Ultimate Power reference.  And by cool, I mean totally sweet.

Check out our official press release after the jump. (more…)

Read Full Post »

pearl-breweryWe held a press conference yesterday in San Antonio at the Pearl Brewery, which is currently being renovated and, upon its completion, will have the largest solar array panel in the state of Texas.  Installed by Austin’s own Meridian Solar, the new system is expected to generate 25% of the energy needs for the new building, which will hold condos, an Aveda hair salon, and an art gallery.

San Antonio is not the first to take on a solar power “experiment” — Houston turned a parking lot into an eco-park that has topped all of its park buildings with solar paneling, and is attempting pull all of its energy usage from solar panels.

With all the advancements of the solar industry, it is a wonder why everyone isn’t just as excited about all the possibilities solar energy systems can offer.

Our past concerns about the reliability of solar energy—“But what will we do if it’s raining?”—now seem archaic.  Over the past decade leading companies have been making sweeping advancements, and now solar technology is more reliable, affordable, and efficient than ever.

pv-solar-panels1What we have developed now is far from the sea of reflective solar panels in that unforgettable scene from Gattaca. New technology consists of a flexible sheet-like material that can simply be laid on top of already existing structures, such as the roofs of buildings. This particular type of solar technology is a branch of material called Photovoltaics (“PV”) that was actually first used to power satellites back in the 1950’s.   The thin-film PV works the same way to convert energy derived from light into electricity, is only a few millionths of a meter thick, and now can be readily and easily installed onto almost any building.

A more familiar type of PV is silicon-based, which can also be made into flexible rolls that can top any surface.  And as technology keeps getting better, the production costs keep on dropping.  It is now even possible for solar conductors to be constructed directly into building materials, called Building Integrated Solar.   Consider this: Thin-Film PV could cover all eastern and western facing windows, or on your car windshield, providing clean, beautiful energy with no visible interference.

In response to “rainy day concerns,” our new solar report, Texas Solar Roadmap, demonstrates that it isn’t as big of a concern as we think.  (more…)

Read Full Post »

CPS committed to spend $60 million more on the proposed expansion of the South Texas Nuclear Project at its Board of Trustees meeting on Tuesday, which brings the city utility’s total expenditures on units 3 & 4 to $267 million.

The construction and operating license still languishes at the NRC, almost a year and a half after being submitted.

Somewhat lost amid the honorings, approvals, and statements of the Board meeting was the fact that STP 3 & 4 ranking for DoE’s loan guarantees has slipped from #1 to #3 (out of 14).  Updated rankings will be out in March.  3rd seems respectable.  It’s a bronze medal, right?  Well, there’s only $18.5 billion slotted for loan guarantees and each reactor can cost $6-who-knows-how-many-billions.

Gschwartz’s piece on this week’s Board of Trustees meeting sums things up pretty well on SA Current’s Queblog.  The Express-News touched on it here and here.

-Matt

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »